Resources for Kesubos daf 52

1. The גמרא brings from a ברייתא (the one at the top of עמוד ב) that a husband needs to be פּודה his wife at her value even if it is ten times her כתובה. If she is captured a second time then רבי says רוצה פּודה רוצה אינו פּודה and רשב"ג says he only pays up to the value of the כתובה. What רוצה פּודה רוצה אינו פּודה means is a מחלוקת ראשונים. רש"י on עמוד א in ד"ה רצה אינו פּודה is of the opinion that the husband doesn’t need to be פּודה her a second time at all as the תקנה was only to be פּודה her once. תוספות in ד"ה רצה says in the name of ר"ח that he must be פּודה her every time she is captured but from the second time and on he only needs to pay up to the value of her כתובה and not more. The רמב"ם in הלכות אישות פּרק י"ד הל׳ י"ט has a third and unique שיטה. The רמב"ם says that the first time he must redeem her for her value even if it is way more than her כתובה. However, the second time he has a choice: he can either choose to redeem her at her value even if it is more than her כתובה or he can simply choose to divorce her and give her כתובה and move on. It comes out that according to רש"י there is no obligation of פּדייה a second time at all, according to the ר"ח there is a modified obligation of only כדי כתובתה and according to theרמב"ם the full obligation of the first time exists of paying her full value but he has the choice to end the marriage and just give her her כתובה. We can understand רש"י—the תקנה of פּירותיה תחת פּירקונה was only for one פּדייה. The ר"ח is a modified version of that. But the רמב"ם is hard to understand—if the husband still has the same obligation each time, why on the first time does the husband not have ethe option to opt out and get divorced and the second time he does? The אבני מילואים in סימן ע"ח אות ג explains that תוספות in ד"ה אין פודין says that the reason a husband can’t just divorce his wife if she gets captured is because he already ate her פּירות so he already owes her the פּדיון. Assuming the רמב"ם agrees with that, the reason he would be able to divorce her the second time is because he already paid for the פּירות.

2. The גמרא brings from the ברייתא that one is not allowed to be פּודה a person for more than their value. רש"י explains that this refers to their value as a slave while the מאירי says it means their general value. The רדב"ז in חלק א׳ סימן מ says it is the typical value of a ransom for such a person. תוספות in גיטין דף מ"ה ד"ה דלא says that a תלמיד חכם is an exception to this rule and you can pay even a very high amount. תוספות on דף נ"ח ד"ה כל says another exception: if there is סכנת נפשות involved then you can pay any amount. That is a major exception as most cases fall under that exception. The רמב"ן however disagrees. The מהרש"ל in ים של שלמה סימן ע"ב paskens like תוספות that כנת נפשות is an exception and says the מנהג is that way. The רדב"ז mentioned above also holds that the מנהג is to pay any amount. The מהרש"ל adds that the גמרא in גיטין is never מכריע if the reason for the rule of not redeeming captives at more than their value is because of דוחקא דציבורא (its too hard on the public) or because it will encourage the practice to happen again. He feels that the הלכה is like the reason of דוחקא דציבורא and therefore says the public has the right to be מוחל and pay a high ransom. Based on all the above the מהרש"ל doesn’t understand why the מהרם מרוטנבורק did not allow himself to be redeemed. However, the שולחן ערוך in יו"ד סימן רנ"ב סעיף ד paskens that the reason to not redeem people for a high amount is to disincentivize רשעים from doing it. The כנסת יחזקאל brought in the פּתחי תשובה there says that if so the היתר of תוספות of פּיקוח נפש shouldn’t apply and תוספות must have been going according to the מ"ד that the reason is because of דוחקא דציבורא.

New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters

Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder

Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander

Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld - Shakla Vetarya

Rabbi Ari Keilson - Maarei Mekomos